Timmons v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “". . . In Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436 , 468 , n. 37, 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 1625 [n. 37], 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) the Supreme Court of the United States announced in dictum that " 'it is impermissible to penalize an individual for exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege when he is under police custodial interrogation. The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial the fact that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation. ' "”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 611 So. 2d 1159 - Harris v. State

2. “"It is commendable that the record does not show any effort on the part of counsel for the State to make capital of the unfortunate statement by the witness. Nevertheless, this did not relieve the evidence of its highly prejudicial nature. It tended to hurt the defendant just as much as if it had been intentionally brought into the case by counsel for the prosecution."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 611 So. 2d 1159 - Harris v. State

3. “"[T]he use of the post-arrest, post- Miranda warning silence of the accused as evidence of his guilt is a violation of the Due Process Clauses of both the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and [Article I] Section Six of the Alabama Constitution of 1901."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 611 So. 2d 1159 - Harris v. State